Community Chat

[faeriemoon]

---

@Lynnster67 wrote:

---

@chrystaltree wrote:

---

@Kachina624 wrote:

I think it's interesting that Charles' and Andrew's children are princes and princesses but Anne's children are not.  

That's because Anne declined titles for her children.  

---

---

IIRC, Edward and his wife also declined titles for their offspring?

---

Yes; although I wonder if that might change when he and his wife become the Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh.

[beckyb1012]

As of now they are styled Lady and Lord as being children of an Earl.  The Queen made the decision from what I have read on the day that Prince Edward was married.  Their titles will be updated when he becomes a Duke.  So confusing I wonder how they ever keep up with it all.

[wvumountiefan]

---

@beckyb1012 wrote:

As of now they are styled Lady and Lord as being children of an Earl.  The Queen made the decision from what I have read on the day that Prince Edward was married.  Their titles will be updated when he becomes a Duke.  So confusing I wonder how they ever keep up with it all.

---

@beckyb1012 I have wondered that also. So is it a long shot for Harry and Meghan’s child to be king, if they do have a son? 

[Whippit]

Kacina624... Princess Anne chose for her Children not to have titles!..

[beckyb1012]

---

@wvumountiefan wrote:

---

@beckyb1012 wrote:

As of now they are styled Lady and Lord as being children of an Earl.  The Queen made the decision from what I have read on the day that Prince Edward was married.  Their titles will be updated when he becomes a Duke.  So confusing I wonder how they ever keep up with it all.

---

@beckyb1012 I have wondered that also. So is it a long shot for Harry and Meghan’s child to be king, if they do have a son? 

---

Very long shot with William then his own offspring.  Just imagine if King Edward had not abdicated and married someone else then Queen Elizabeth and her crew would be way down the line due to his children.  Amazing how it can all come or not come about @wvumountiefan

[patbz]

@beckyb1012: Things can change the order of ascension; that's why I mentioned if  something happened to Charles prior to his becoming king.  If that happened why wouldn't it be Andrew and then Edward and his children?  Btw royal girls born after 2010 have same rights of ascension as their brothers or cousins.

[lulu1]

Apparently if a king abdicates and has no heirs, a sibling becomes king.  This was the case in Queen Elizabeth's uncle and father.  Had her uncle had an heir, her father would not have become king.

[beckyb1012]

---

@patbz wrote:

@beckyb1012: Things can change the order of ascension; that's why I mentioned if  something happened to Charles prior to his becoming king.  If that happened why wouldn't it be Andrew and then Edward and his children?  Btw royal girls born after 2010 have same rights of ascension as their brothers or cousins.

---

With Charles having his first child, William just like Charles was Elizabeth's first child.  With the girls the one I find interesting is in Sweden they changed their lines of ascension when her younger brother was one year old.  For the first year of his life he was to be the next King.  Now with the swipe of that pen back in the early 70's Princess Victoria is to be Queen of Sweden and her children after her.  So fascinating.

[occasionalrain]

Harry and his children will drop further down on the list when Prince George has children.  

[RainCityWoman]

I am always amused at this thing the Brits have with preference and titles automatically given to male heirs. One of the world's greatest monarchs in history and certainly in British history was Queen Elizabeth I, daughter of Henry VIII. She left no heirs, but ruled with determination and strength. Her navy defeated the invincible Spanish Armada, and her reign was to explore the world and increase British territory. The Age of Elizabeth was the Age of Shaespeare, and he wrote to please his Qyeen. When her cousin in Scotland began an uprising against her, she took the bold step to have her beheaded for treason. She was a gutsy lady. At her death, the British throne reverted to James the 6th of Scotland who became James I of England. He carried on with the strengths Elizabeth had in her reign. She didn't pass on the crown to any progeny, but her legacy has dominated in history.